Does DNA Have Telepathic Properties?

[Oneironaut Zero]

Another fascinating article, courtesy of StumbleUpon. Thoughts? Theories? Arguments?

[ChaybaChayba]

Wow that's a very cool article, thanks for linking. I've heard of an explanation for this a while ago. DNA is supposed to be some kind of radio antenna that can resonate with the right energy vibrations, which would explain the telepathy. Just like a tuning fork can resonate with the right vibrations of sound.

[High Hunter]

Dude O, I love these articles. Keep 'em coming yo!!! This reminds me of something I've read in a Terrence McKenna book... I am going to further investigate on this. I'll make sure to post anything related I find. Cool shi* !

[Oneironaut Zero]

Glad you two enjoyed the read. Chayba: I could see that being an explanation. If this is true, though, wouldn't it lend credence to the idea of telepathy (in the cognitive, metaphysical sense) being a possibility?

[High Hunter]

Here's something else I came across today, http://www.livescience.com/health/08...telepathy.html

[LucidFlanders]

Another fascinating article, courtesy of StumbleUpon. Thoughts? Theories? Arguments? Maybe, i mean this really did happen to me, no joke. I was walking to go downstairs, i passed a big jar of spagetti noodles at the far end of the counter on the wall, i go downstairs, then later come back up and it was laying on the floor. What the fuck gives? there was no earthquake, no rumbling from a big truck, nothing...it just somehow fell on it's own. It made me question if it was me....or of course some ghost that dropped it, as it would not surprise me...i have heard some really strange things in my house over the years.

[Xei]

To understand what researchers conjecture is really happening, think of double helixes of DNA as corkscrews. The bases that make up a strand of DNA each cause the corkscrew to bend one way or the other. Double-stranded DNA with identical sequences each result in corkscrews "whose ridges and grooves match up," said researcher Sergey Leikin, a physical biochemist at the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development in Bethesda, Md. The electrically charged chains of sugars and phosphates of double helixes of DNA cause the molecules to repel each other. However, identical DNA double helixes have matching curves, meaning they repel each other the least, Leikin explained. It's nothing special really. There are much more impressive effects in molecular biology... phospholipid bilayers are a nice example.

[Oneironaut Zero]

It's nothing special really. So please explain the unremarkable properties (of what is happening that makes such communication at a distance possible) for me, in layman's terms, if you don't mind. (Throwing in an explanation of what "phospholipid bilayers" are would be nice, too.)

[DeathCell]

Things are complicated

[Xei]

So please explain the unremarkable properties (of what is happening that makes such communication at a distance possible) for me, in layman's terms, if you don't mind. (Throwing in an explanation of what "phospholipid bilayers" are would be nice, too.) The explanation was in my quote. Phospholipid bilayers are what the boundaries of cells are made of. They're cool because they form spontaneously.

[Sornaensis]

Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrr... DNA is a chemical. A complex one. Of course it's going to react with other molecules simliar to it in different ways, which may give the false impression of actual 'intelligence' or foresight behind it. Kind of like watching ants build an anthill. Each individual ant is doing something different, but the end result may almost imply total coordination where there is none. The sum of many smaller processes.

[Original Poster]

I knowed it came from stumbleupon.com the moment I saw this thread.

[Oneironaut Zero]

I've gotta say that I find a bit of entertainment that, even with the dissent, no one has offered an explanation as to how the DNA recognizes similar molecules "over a distance", which is what the article about.

[Sornaensis]

I've gotta say that I find a bit of entertainment that, even with the dissent, no one has offered an explanation as to how the DNA recognizes similar molecules "over a distance", which is what the article about. Well, that's the point. We don't know. 'Telepathy' is generally used to mean transferring 'information' from one 'brain' to another with no physical connection, which is impossible. They have to be connected somehow. You might as well ask physicists what happens 'in' a singularity. No one knows, yet.

[Original Poster]

How about when two particles become connected, even if they're separated by vast distances they retain this connection? What you do to a particle effects every particle it has ever connected to. And impossible? Come on roxxor, information travels through the telephone, through radiowaves. The brain holds information, the brain sends radio waves... so I don't think this is even close to impossible. It's not even improbable.

[Sornaensis]

How about when two particles become connected, even if they're separated by vast distances they retain this connection? What you do to a particle effects every particle it has ever connected to. And impossible? Come on roxxor, information travels through the telephone, through radiowaves. The brain holds information, the brain sends radio waves... so I don't think this is even close to impossible. It's not even improbable. Electromagnetic radiation is still a form of a connection, and brainwaves can't be sent through any medium other than neurons by the brain alone. It jsut won't happen. This seems like how you could rephrase atomic bonding by asking how atoms 'know' what atoms are around them, and how to react. Well, those events follow the laws of chemistry.

[Oneironaut Zero]

Well, that's the point. We don't know. 'Telepathy' is generally used to mean transferring 'information' from one 'brain' to another with no physical connection, which is impossible. They have to be connected somehow. You might as well ask physicists what happens 'in' a singularity. No one knows, yet. So why the dissent? Why so quick to say "Oh, it's nothing special" or "Errrrrrrrrrr...." and simplify what is taking place, when you (not you, specifically, unless you feel you fall into the catagory) actually don't even know what is taking place? I just find that somewhat telling. The article is highlighting the fact that the interaction is one that's not understood, and people are so quick to jump and try to minimize the mystery behind the topic, without even understanding it themselves (or, at least, that's what I see). So, yeah, it looks a bit humorous, from my perspective.

[Original Poster]

Electromagnetic radiation is still a form of a connection, and brainwaves can't be sent through any medium other than neurons by the brain alone. It jsut won't happen. This seems like how you could rephrase atomic bonding by asking how atoms 'know' what atoms are around them, and how to react. Well, those events follow the laws of chemistry. You say a lot of matter of fact things that directly contradict the new discoveries of physics.

[Xaqaria]

This seems like how you could rephrase atomic bonding by asking how atoms 'know' what atoms are around them, and how to react. Well, those events follow the laws of chemistry. Whats the difference?

[Xei]

I've gotta say that I find a bit of entertainment that, even with the dissent, no one has offered an explanation as to how the DNA recognizes similar molecules "over a distance", which is what the article about. I did. I'm not sure what you mean by 'at a distance'. The article doesn't explain this. All chemical interactions take place 'at a distance'.

[Xaqaria]

I did. I'm not sure what you mean by 'at a distance'. The article doesn't explain this. All chemical interactions take place 'at a distance'. Actually, the article did explain it; “Amazingly, the forces responsible for the sequence recognition can reach across more than one nanometer of water separating the surfaces of the nearest neighbor DNA,”

[Xei]

I thought I'd read that, but I couldn't find it on rereading. I really have no idea what this is about. It sounds very like one of those word of mouth things where an ordinary scientific article with some flashy language has been completely misinterpreted by some hippie blogger. A nanometer is about 10 water molecules. How on earth they could accurately separate two DNA molecules by this distance is beyond me, it's completely unexplained by the article and as it stands simply makes no physical sense. After they did, brownian motion, and the fact that DNA moelcules are large enough to be significantly hydrophobic, would have brought them together.